Talk:Eddie Bayers/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer:  SabreBD  (talk)  20:32, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Its been far too long a delay. I have just started on this and will post here when I have time to get some comments together.-- SabreBD  (talk)  20:32, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Reasonably well written and generally complies sufficiently with the MoS, but there are couple of issues with MOS:BIO
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Not all online references are live links
 * The article is very well referenced.
 * Sources all appear to be reliable
 * All sources that can be linked support the cited statements
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage of important aspects of the subjects life and career.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * It appears fair and un-biassed
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * Stable, no edit warring
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * One image used, with correct licensing and a caption. Might be nice to see more pictures (for example one with a band - although I know this can be difficult), but not a GA requirement
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

This is a well-written and very well-sourced article that can easily pass the good article review with a couple of minor fixes:
 * MOS:BIO says that the opening paragraph (i.e. the lead) of a biographical article should contain the date of birth (its on the infobox, but just needs adding to the text) and indicates it should include nationality.
 * The article is very well referenced and these are consistent and conform to the guidelines, but some of the references do not go through to the target article (notes 1 and 6 for example) - probably because the target has been moved. Either the target needs to be found or some other sources found. Note 1 is quite important as it substantiates the basic biographical details.

It should be possible to pass the article as GA when these minor points are fixed.-- SabreBD  (talk)  22:28, 27 July 2010 (UTC)